Recent reports from China have shown a series of violent incidents in various regions, including Zhuhai in Guangdong province, Wuxi in Jiangsu province, and Changde in Hunan province. The Chinese authorities have called for targeted prevention efforts and launched extensive screening operations across the country. Some universities are monitoring students around the clock, with reports of confiscating items like fruit knives in dormitories. Analysts believe that the heightened surveillance by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is leading to increased resentment among the people. If this tension is not alleviated, it may result in further harm to vulnerable individuals.
Screenshots circulating online revealed that on November 19th, Huaiyin Teachers College in Jiangsu province issued a notice to confiscate items such as fruit knives, scissors, machetes, and cleavers from dormitories.
A resident named Wang in Jiangsu disclosed to New Tang Dynasty Television that at Changshu Institute of Technology, where she is enrolled and near Wuxi, the school administration is on high alert, requiring 24-hour monitoring of students.
Wang mentioned that the school introduced a mandatory smart student management app, which tracks students’ activities such as morning exercises check-ins, class attendance, facial recognition, audio recording, video recording, and location tracking. This level of surveillance allows monitoring of almost every aspect of students’ lives, including their speech, emotional state, parents’ financial status, and family background, creating an all-encompassing control mechanism.
In recent weeks, China has been marred by violent incidents. On November 11th, an indiscriminate vehicular attack at Zhuhai Sports Center in Guangdong resulted in 35 deaths and 43 injuries. Subsequent incidents included an attack at Wuxi Industrial and Commercial Vocational College in Jiangsu on the 16th, causing 8 deaths and 17 injuries, and another deliberate vehicle ramming at Yong’an Elementary School in Changde, Hunan on the 19th.
Following these tragedies, authorities initiated sweeping screening procedures, targeting what they call the “Four Nos and Five Losses,” referring to nine categories of so-called “high-risk individuals.” The “Four Nos” include those without a spouse, children, stable income, or property, while the “Five Losses” group encompasses individuals with failed investments, life disappointments, broken relationships, psychological imbalances, or mental abnormalities. Analysts argue that such broad categorization may not effectively address the root causes and could potentially subject a vast portion of the population to scrutiny, as everyone faces challenging times.
Concerns have been raised that under these criteria, nearly “90% of the total population” could be identified for screening. Questions arise on what actions should be taken post-screening – should individuals be sent to concentration camps, detained, or isolated based on the results?
Commentator Li Lin previously highlighted to Epoch Times that the CCP prioritizes political stability over addressing systemic issues causing public discontent, opting for control measures rather than tackling injustices that fuel resentment.
He pointed out that the CCP endeavors to regulate not just actions but also thoughts. As everyone experiences setbacks, any emotional response could lead to being reported and subjected to surveillance. The recent series of violent incidents might serve as a pretext for an extensive cleansing and surveillance campaign by the CCP, further exacerbating public resentment. However, if not alleviated, it is the most vulnerable who will suffer the consequences.
Rong-wei Lai, Executive Director of Taiwan Inspiration Association (TIA), noted that Chinese authorities target individuals deemed at risk due to lack of income, family, housing, or mental health issues, employing strict surveillance as a means to suppress dissenting voices.
Former Chinese rights lawyer Teng Biao informed Voice of America that official screening efforts fail to address fundamental issues contributing to violent events like the Zhuhai tragedy. According to Teng, social instability in China stems from decades of accumulated social conflicts, political corruption, limited civil rights, and the eruption of underlying social and political tensions masked by previous economic growth. He criticized the post-incident screenings as misguided, blaming marginalized and victimized individuals for society’s conflicts.
Historian Yuan-hua Li, currently residing in Australia, emphasized to Epoch Times that mounting public grievances in China, often stemming from unresolved issues, escalate into grave societal incidents. He critiqued the CCP’s disproportionate use of violence and suppression, noting that without a moral compass, individuals resort to indiscriminate violence to attract attention, exacerbating distrust in society. The CCP’s stability maintenance measures fail to address citizens’ real concerns, opting for surveillance and control, ultimately intensifying grievances instead of alleviating them.
On November 19th, former chief correspondent for Nikkei Shimbun in Taipei, Akio Yaita, referenced a quote from Laozi, expressing concerns that extreme measures lose effectiveness when society faces severe hardships. If China’s economic conditions do not improve, incidents of violent retribution against society may persist.
Regarding the Zhuhai Sports Center incident where a vehicle rammed into a crowd, authorities reported that the 62-year-old suspect, Fan, carried out the attack over dissatisfaction with the outcome of his divorce settlement, omitting his alleged discontent with a prior court ruling before the incident.
At Wuxi Industrial and Commercial Vocational College, 21-year-old recent graduate Xu indiscriminately attacked fellow students with a knife, with official reports attributing the motive to dissatisfaction over delayed receipt of his graduation certificate and internship payment. However, internal sources suggest a more complex narrative involving how the suspect was driven to desperate measures, potential exploitation, and persecution by school officials, along with the family’s failed attempts to address these issues through the provincial discipline inspection commission.
Online discussions relating to the three recent attack incidents in Guangdong, Jiangsu, and Hunan have faced strict censorship on Chinese cyberspace platforms. Platforms such as Weibo have censored numerous trending topics associated with these incidents, promoting official narratives while denying allegedly inaccurate rumors.
The CCP’s information control efforts extend to articles advocating for understanding and stress relief for the Chinese populace. Calls from figures like Professor Wei-guo Qu of Fudan University for enhanced oversight of governmental powers and Professor Ji-lin Xu of East China Normal University urging for legal channels to release societal tension have been silenced. Additionally, an essay by Professor Xu Han of Sichuan University, titled “Fair Justice as a Pressure Valve for Society,” was also censored.
The Chinese media has remained silent on the recent violent incidents, with official police reports being the sole source of information for the public. However, these reports can be vague at times, such as the lack of disclosed injury figures in the Changde police report and the omission of the suspect’s legal disputes and discontent over court rulings in subsequent versions of the Zhuhai police report.
Not only have the Chinese media refrained from independent coverage of the recent attacks, foreign journalists have faced obstruction as well. Reporters from Reuters, Agence France-Presse, and the BBC were impeded while paying respect at the Zhuhai incident site. A journalist from TBS in Japan was even detained by Chinese authorities.
Former Southern Weekend journalist, Chaoxin Chu, urged authorities to swiftly uncover the truth and disseminate accurate information while allowing media to conduct thorough investigations and report truthfully. Chu stressed the importance of easing the tense atmosphere by providing more information to the public, but his writings have since been censored by WeChat.